| Previous | Return to table of contents | Search Reports | Next |
| « Back to weltagrarbericht.de | ||
griculture in Latin America and the Caribbean: Context, Evolution and Current Situation | 15
Table 1-4. Gini coefficient of the income distribution around the years 1999, 2002 and 2005. Source: CEPAL 2006
based on special tabulation of the household surveys in each country.
| Inequality level | Around 1999 | Around 2002 | Around 2005 |
| Very High 0.580–1 |
Brazil 0.640 Bolivia 0.586 Nicaragua 0.584 |
Brazil 0.639 Bolivia 0.614 Honduras 0.588 |
Brazil 0.613 Honduras 0.587 Colombia 0.584 |
| High 0.520–0.579 |
Colombia 0.572 Paraguay 0.565 Honduras 0.564 Chile 0.560 Guatemala 0.560 Dominican Rep. 0.554 Peru 0.545 Argentinab 0.539 México 0.539 Ecuadorb 0.521 |
Nicaragua 0.579 Argentinab 0.578 Paraguay 0.570 Colombia 0.569 Chile 0.559 Dominican Rep. 0.544 Guatemala 0.542 El Salvador 0.525 Peru 0.525 |
Nicaragua (2001) 0.579 Dominican Rep. 0.569 Chile 0.550 Guatemala (2002) 0.542 Paraguay 0.536 México 0.528 Argentinab 0.526 |
| Medium 0.470–0.519 |
El Salvador 0.518 Panamab 0.513 Venez. (Rep. Bol.) 0.498 Costa Rica 0.473 |
Panamab 0.515 México 0.514 Ecuadorb 0.513 Venez. (Rep. Bol.) 0.500 Costa Rica 0.488 |
Ecuadorb 0.513 Peru 0.505 Panamab 0.500 El Salvador 0.493 Venez. (Rep. Bol.) 0.490 Costa Rica 0.470 |
| Low 0–0.469 |
Uruguayb 0.440 |
Uruguayb 0.455 |
Uruguayb 0.451 |
a The limit values of each category of the Gini coefficient are the same employed in chapter I of CEPAL, 2004.
b Urban areas.
|
In rural areas in particular, a very small percentage of the poor complete their secondary studies (UNDP, 2005a). In addition to the supply factors (availability of schools and quality of teaching), this may also reflect demand factors: with adolescents who work on the farm, or as wage-earning employees, the opportunity cost of sending them to school— without considering the costs of schooling and of room and board for those who must live in the town—is considerably greater than in urban areas. |
On average, illiteracy in rural areas is two to six times greater than in urban areas and on average rural dwellers have three fewer years of schooling than urban dwellers. If one divides schooling into primary and secondary, it is clear that the difference is not so great at the primary level; nonetheless, the situation is completely different for the secondary level and the percentages are even lower in poor rural areas (World Bank, 1992; Psacharopoulos, 1993).
|
Table 1-5. Evolution of urban and rural poverty in Latin America and the Caribbean (Absolute and relative numbers).
Poor Population |
Years |
|||||
1970 |
1980 |
1986 |
1990 |
1994 |
1997 |
|
| Total | 119,800 |
135,900 |
170,200 |
200,200 |
201,500 |
204,000 |
| Urban | 44,200 |
62,900 |
94,400 |
121,700 |
125,900 |
125,800 |
| Rural | 75,600 |
73,000 |
75,800 |
78,500 |
75,600 |
78,200 |
| Urbanization of poverty (percentage) |
36.9 |
46.3 |
55.5 |
60.8 |
62.5 |
61.7 |
Percent of poor households |
||||||
| Total households | 45 |
35 |
- |
41 |
38 |
36 |
| Urban Area (a) | 29 |
25 |
- |
35 |
32 |
30 |
| Rural Area (b) | 67 |
54 |
- |
58 |
56 |
54 |
| Rural/Urban relation (b/a) | 2.3 |
2.2 |
- |
1.6 |
1.7 |
1.8 |
Note: percent of poor households (100: Total households according to area of residence).
Source: CEPAL, 1994b, 1999.
| Previous | Return to table of contents | Search Reports | Next |
| « Back to weltagrarbericht.de | ||